The state of packages based on Python ports

[Paul Hoffman]

On Feb 1, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Mark Linimon wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 01, 2012 at 07:53:41AM -0800, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>> HOWEVER, it doesn't answer the question of packages for 3.x. Is the
>> policy "there can be (mostly) only one set of packages for Python
>> modules, and that is for the preferred version"?
> 
> It's a code limitation rather than policy.  We would have to run two
> back-to-back bulk builds, one with the switch thrown one way, and one
> with it the other.  The builds are scheduled off the hierarchy as
> built via 'make index', and thus two different INDEX files are required.
> 
> It could be done but it's kind of a PITA with the way things are set up,
> so we had never really considered doing it.

Drat, but that makes sense. It would be a PITA, now that I think about how it would need to happen.

> You might want to look at the just-added port ports-mgmt/poudriere to
> see if it would help your problem locally.

Or even globally; this could work. I'll think more about it.

--Paul Hoffman